Holy shit, my fucking sides

Holy shit, my fucking sides.

Attached: debate.png (626x867, 343K)

Other urls found in this thread:

theguardian.com/world/2019/apr/20/jordan-peterson-slavoj-zizek-happiness-capitalism-marxism
youtu.be/OV3xp5ZXSYA
youtu.be/Cv6tgnx6jTQ
youtu.be/SaolVEJEjV4
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

>Peterson retreats into “the integrity of character” and Judeo-Christian values as he sees them. Žižek is more or less a Gen X nostalgia act at this point, a living memento from a time when you would sit around the college bar and regale your fellow students about the time you saw that eastern European prof eating a couple of hot dogs in the street.
>Unfortunately, this brief moment of confrontation of their shared failure couldn’t last. They returned to their natural subject: who is the enemy? Žižek asked what Peterson meant by cultural Marxists when postmodern thinkers, like Foucault, weren’t Marxist at all. Peterson was an expert on this subject, at least. He gave a minor history of the French critical theorists who transposed categories of class oppression for group oppression in the 1960s.

Attached: 959544595.jpg (879x627, 101K)

What website?

the guardian
theguardian.com/world/2019/apr/20/jordan-peterson-slavoj-zizek-happiness-capitalism-marxism

The real problem was that neither of these slobs took the time to look into the other. Zizek thought he was dealing with ben shapiro, Peterson thought he was dealing with a Marx quoting community college prof.

Zizek literally referenced a bunch of peterson's retarded views, how exactly did he treat him like ben shapiro lmao

>capitalism compels Zizek, already a court jester, to appear in rushed and shallow debates about capitalism that don't really say anything about capitalism
>so people can pay for tickets and clap like seals
>human beings so alienated from the most essential aspect of human nature, SPEAKING TO ONE ANOTHER, that they force it to fit the mold of a televised, for-profit, pre-fab debate format and never end up FUCKING TALKING TO EACH OTHER

Capitalism

>Zizek literally referenced a bunch of peterson's retarded views
No, he didn't, he looked up a few of the rules for life on google or some shit and saw that Peterson was complaining about bloody neomarxists. He then demanded names, was told 1/4 of professors meet the description, and then kept demanding names anyway.

The whole thing was boring. Zizek won, but I don't applaud him for it because he's the reason the debate was neutered in the first place and then when he saw that Peterson was unprepared he gave up his old pretense of "this is only a discussion" and went after him. The real take away is that you can't expect anything from two academics but a coward and a conman

>t-they're both pretty cringe r-right?
This is what Peterson cultists tell themselves

Zizek and Peterson should have had their talk on Joe Rogan, the memeability would have been off the charts

Zizek wasn't cringe, he was just kind of boring. I'm sorry if I disparaged someone you personally project your feelings onto.

>No, he didn't
Watch the debate instead of shitposting, retard.

Perhaps the real ideology is the dragons of chaos we made along the way.

>Watch the debate instead of shitposting, retard.
Watch the debate instead of shitposting, retard

>tfw you wanted to fight a Marxist edgelord but you ended up becoming buddies instead and had more in common with him than you thought
>tfw he's marrying your daughter next year

Attached: 1488230488184.jpg (2560x1440, 292K)

The Guardian indeed shat on both.

"Max thought the proletariat was good and the bourgeoisie was evil"

Thats literally the basis of Communism. Who ever wrote this is retarded

I knew Max Landis was a filthy commie!

Attached: max-landis.jpg (618x412, 149K)

And added nothing to the conversation doing it.

Wow, yet Peterson was clearly the biggest clown of the two nonetheless

Sigh... Wrong.

>mfw jordan peterson

Attached: picard-facepalm.jpg (895x503, 33K)

>tfw he's marrying your daughter next year
I would lose my shit if he boomer Zizek daughter-cucked Peterson.

Attached: 51691406_1541585649307462_5629587432193828691_n.jpg (933x933, 111K)

So the Guardian is literally fabricating false quotes? Is that not something that's frowned upon in the world of journalism?

marx doesn’t make moralistic condemnations of the bourgeoisie. it’s a materialist philosophy

No, you retard. Of course deeming your group the 'good' and the opposition 'evil' in a political conflict is a very useful political tool. But that's all it is, a political tool. In reality the poor are just as responsible for riches as the rich are for poverty.

IMAGINE caring this much about politics, while CHAD fucks STACY

Attached: 1552071294422.png (543x557, 534K)

what do you call this kind of hips that women sometimes have where it's not very rounded at the hips proper, but it's still nice and curvy at the thighs and lower ass

>caring about chads and stacies
How's high school, mate?

Good and bad?
>Execute the kulaks
What do you means good and bad?
>Force teachers to work in the field
We don't deal in absolute here
>Empty your cities

This is retarded. They barely disagreed. J*urnalists are even worse than people who post NGE porn on Yea Forums. Dumb animals.

>Zizek
>On his third marriage
>Second wife was a model
>Has three children, all fathered by other men

Totally Chad

Friendship is ended with Peterson now Zizek is my best friend

Attached: friendship ended with peterson.jpg (1920x1080, 335K)

>"Marx thought the proletariat was good and the bourgeoisie was evil"
How can the guardian report this as a quote? This is the actual quote
>"You have a binary class division, proletariat/bourgeois, and you have an implicit idea that all of the good is on the side of the proletariat and all of the evil is on the side on the bourgeois, and that’s classic group identity thinking."

The next point, that Peterson claimed human hierarchies are not determined by power is even less true. What Peterson actually said was power isn't the only basis of hierarchies and that hierarchies formed through exploitation are unstable.

It then goes on to completely misrepresent Zizek by claimed he said
>“Most of the attacks on me are from left-liberals,” he began, hoping that “they would be turning in their graves even if they were still alive”
These things were said far apart and the second quote is incredibly misleading and taken completely out of context.

which quote was fabricated?

Peterson is a Koch shill

I- Wha... Fuck. Best idea to come out of the deabte so far

faggot

Materialism doesn't just preclude you from making moralistic judgements, they're just framed differently. Human beings view things in a moralistic frame, which doesn't necessarily constitute good and evil but it always is constituted by a framework of moral failings and moral hierarchy of some sort.

Dude, that article was shit you could tell just by reading it that it had no intention of in good-faith representing what happened.

He actually did.

Did you miss his absolutely brutal take down on Peterson's reading of Dostoevsky? Were you awake user?

>the press
>good-faith representing what happened.
user remain serious

A fridge-like body.

straight man

cishet bitch

im just sad that it's over because my life sucks and it was one of the only things i was looking forward to all month

none of that is marx retard

rewatch the debate, brainlet

>People take seriously the views of a Professor who raised a thot like this

Attached: 45645646.jpg (300x300, 17K)

deadass not knowing the reason the cities were emptied was that they were spared from the bombing campaign which predominantly the Cambodian countryside and led to a very retribution rural politic. It's not a Marxist theory so much as one born from the urban/rural divide of Khmer Republic.

there's eurovision in some weeks, come join us at /int/ user

was this post machine translated

Only authentic post in these threads
stay safe user uw u

>human hierarchies are not determined by power

lmao what

alright listen man. I legit drove to Toronto and watched the debate in person. Zizek roasted his take of Dostoevsky, criticized his reasoning of natural hierarchies, directly questioned his claim that marx was an egalitarian and asked why he hasn't read Gotha Program, asked him to name and explain postmodern neomarxism, he argued against "setting your own house in order..." I mean Jordan Peterson didn't even criticize anything Zizek said, he misunderstood basic marxist terminology like "dictatorship of the proletariat" and accused marx of a moralized political economy which he outwardly rejects in all of his works. Did you even watch the debate?

I get that people like to suck Peterson's dick but like take the L. He was ill-prepared and got caught of guard completely by an actual good faith marxist. I expected Zizek to eat shit but he dominated not only the entire discussion but the crowd too. Peterson looked baffled for much of the discussion. It was frankly embarrassing and I don't mean that in a malicious way.

Wow, that should be great.
youtu.be/OV3xp5ZXSYA
youtu.be/Cv6tgnx6jTQ
youtu.be/SaolVEJEjV4

>faggots mods won't make a Yea Forums sticky

No u